A home is, for most people, their greatest source of wealth. A property tax is, therefore, a wealth tax. If you spike a property tax, then ownership becomes expensive, and therefore, difficult. What part of this escapes you?
So instead of even a modest 1500 square foot home on a 0.15 acre lot, people will be living in a 700 square foot apartment in a huge high-rise because it escapes paying 30% of value to the tax authority every year. Um, duh. Go upstairs and talk to your parents, they can probably explain it to you.
"Wealth", in these tax schemes, is typically represented by owning something. Usually, that's stock or some other ownership stake, ie investment. When you tax this, people invest less. Which means that: -Angel investing/venture capital for the next big technological marvel dries up -Stocks that fund every major pension fund or 401k-style account in the world lose value as investments have to be sold to pay the tax man. Result is retirees suffer and retirement becomes a pipe dream for most, because you've made it impossible to save meaningfully -Home/property ownership becomes a game for the rich; most people will have to rent to avoid the tax on ownership.
The major reason we don't tax "wealth" until a gain is realized (Capital Gain tax) is that we WANT people to invest and take ownership. This is the essence of what drives the international economy. If you'd like the current global recession to become a global, multi-decade depression, just do this. Watch companies and capital dry up and blow away....
You only make a small part of the money involved in capturing an asteroid on commercially-viable minerals/metals like gold.
What people will pay for a space rock is way more important than what people will pay for gold. A 500 ton asteroid could be 500 tons of rock. But that would make millions of lumps of Space Rock that could be sold by The Franklin Mint in a special collectors set.
Your problem is that you're engaged in insanity. Meaning, you keep doing the same thing while expecting a different result.
Why does it have to be email? You want to have an impact, but everyone has to come to you? Fuck off. Seriously. You're not so important that your electronic musings should get special routing - and, if you check all the misguided posts about donations and big-money special interests, you'll see that they're all focused on making you important.
Your problem isn't importance. Which is why I call those other posts misguided. This isn't even a national figure you're talking about, it's a state-level politician. So, as a voting (you do vote, right?) constituent, you're actually important enough. You just can't expect every representative you have to come to your doorstep at a time convenient to you and ask what you want or somehow magically know it's YOU with an Original Thought. That, my friend, is your problem.
If the issue is important to you, take a day off and visit their office. They all have one, and it can't be all that far away if it's in-state. Talk to a staffer; they'll write down your name, address and concerns. If you're in their district, it WILL be seen. Or, if you call ahead, you might just be able to come at a time when your representative can actually sit down and talk to you. Or hell, offer to buy a drink after legislative hours. That is a human being in that office, you know; that sort of thing tends to work with people.
The big problem here is that, much like the occupy retards, you're not willing to get off your ass and engage the system. You expect the system to come to you and listen while you whine. That doesn't work for anything, anywhere. Wait for a town hall meeting and cuss at the microphone with the other cranks.
It is only fair to note that, when you got in, anybody who could spell "I.T." could get an IT jobs. There was an explosion of tech job in the late 1990s, but that bubble has, long since, burst.
The field totally crashed in 2000, and before it recovered, there were more massive layoffs in 2009.
I'd like to address this directly, because it does come up a lot, and actually illustrates what I'm talking about.
In the mid to late 1990s, there were indeed lots of people flooding into IT. Most of them were picking up a little bit of HTML, building horrible websites, and making really inappropriate amounts of money. They had no interest in technology, they just had interest in money.
The crash of 2000, which went well into 2002, swept all of these people aside. They went to follow their next get-rich-quick scheme, whether that means opening a cappuchino stand, selling Amway, or flipping houses. And believe me, they're bitter about it. As it turns out, money usually only comes through hard work.
The ones that stayed were typically the ones who actually had done core languages like C or Java, or made themselves into legitimate DBAs or server admins. They cared about their work, and bothered to ground themselves in their chosen career like any professional would do.
The people who are now making decisions (hiring managers, CIOs, etc) likely came into IT in a time when very few places offered a degree in any such thing. So a lack of a degree doesn't say much to them. Experience, skill, a desire to stay current...these things are more important than whether a college student settled on the right degree at the right time.
The 90s are an example, that's true; they're also a counter-example. Be the counter-example.
But it's still a rather hard thing this person is looking to do. No one on this board has said it'd be easy; just that it's possible. If the OP stresses the personal time spent learning languages and working on projects, and can come off as someone who isn't going to bail on IT the minute they find a graduate program/other job, then there's a chance. But you have to find the right person...and then convince them.
I've spent the last 15 years in IT performing various tasks, from programming to server admin.
You can do what you're looking to do. Here's the problem: Someone, somewhere, has to be the first to take a risk and hire you to do this. Once you have experience, you're on your way, because IT is still an area where experience and excellence speak louder than degrees or certifications. (although that is starting to change)
The problem is, with the influx of people from around the world, offshoring, and new grads with legitimate degrees every year, who would take you? If you can find that person, great - you're "in". So the key is to network, get yourself in front of people, and highlight your development experience. I guarantee your resume won't get past the HR Drone filter looking for a specific degree. So you need to pound pavement and press flesh. It's what I did for my first 2 jobs; after that it was easier. It will also make your subsequent career easier to navigate.
If that sounds like a bit more than your interpersonal skills and contact network can handle, stretch your graduation day a couple of years out and take the classes you need to get the degree. It will make the task much easier.
Yes, this is how it commonly starts. Of course, you can keep the rest of the information; namely, your name and zip code. They also store everything you bought, what time, and where.
You can take the name/zip code information and compare that to the bulk download of information you got from the credit rating agency of your choice. That should tell you most of the financial information you want, including most of your former/current addresses and a decent guess at the equity on your home and your open credit card lines and what brand of car you drive (car loan). You can then run that by the info from a company like Axicom if you really want to build a profile, but I would guess that a place like Target would be happy with the trades (credit rating company info).
Once you've got that down, you can store/track every single thing purchased and build your own profile. Kind of the way they highlight in TFA. You can also cross that with census data to try to adjust the mix of product in the store - which is why you see things like grape soda in highly urban McDonalds, but not other places.
Really, if you want privacy, you should buy with cash. I know credit cards are convenient and safer than cash (as a general rule), but until we all feel better about walking around with a stack of 100s when we want to buy a TV/computer/etc, there you are.
Governor Orval Fabius of Arkansas, Democrat, in 1957 used the Arkansas National Guard to keep black kids out of white schools after the US Supreme Court ruled for integration in Brown v. Board of Education.
President Eisenhower, Republican, took over the Arkansas National Guard and sent in the 101st Airborne to get those kids into school.
This kind of thing happened all over the segregated South. Yes, through the 1950s and the 1960s.
You aren't just ignorant, but arrogant about pushing your completely fabricated version of history. Push your toxins where people don't read.
Rights? Go look at the civil rights struggles. The Republicans were the defenders of civil rights; the Democrats were the ones trying to make black people sit in the back of the bus. You really think a Dem would call in the national guard to let a little girl go to a better school? And that difference goes back to the 1800s when the Republican Party was founded.
Now, the "Affordable Care Act" already chokes down Medicare over the next 10 years. So that's done. Hey, any Repubs vote for that one? Strike 1.
Lower taxes on the top 1%? They make 19% of all income and pay 28% of all taxes. The top 20% makes more than $73,000/yr as a family and pays 69% of all taxes. Realize that most people on this board are in that group, then further realize that, at some point, those people choose to stop making money in the USA. Another little point for you is that 47% of Americans pay absolutely no Federal income tax, and a large portion of that 47% actually makes money by filing a tax return. You can have all of no pie, a huge piece of a tiny pie, or a slice of a gigantic, growing pie. Pigs get slaughtered, dude. Econ/math fail, strike 2.
Social security will *fail* if something drastic isn't done. The more folks like you fearmonger about any possible solution, the more hard-core that solution will need to be. It's ending. It can't go on. Deal with it and move on. You're just FUDing now, strike 3.
The American system assumes that all branches are co-equal, each with their own powers. There are checks/balances in place to prevent one branch from stepping all over the other 2.
One of these checks is the above clause. Imagine, if you will, that the President has a law before Congress and the vote is close. By instructing the TSA/FBI/CIA/etc (which are agencies of the Executive branch and under the President's direct control) to detain a few specific legislators, he could ensure the vote goes the way he wants.
Or, by detaining legislators, any President could extract promises of support....the possible abuses are obvious and many.
This is why so very many sources are going out of their way to say that Senator Paul was NOT detained. And, I would guess, the use of the word, "detained", was not an accident by Senator Paul. I would further guess that the TSA did indeed detain him, and that the whole thing is getting a massive CYA treatment from smarter folks higher up on the Washington DC food chain.
Also, this is why Congresscritters can perform acts of insider trading...oversight in that area comes from the Executive branch, which has a hard time getting someone in the Legislative on anything other than Treason or big-time felonies. So they don't bother, and the Legislative branch has chosen not to police itself in this area.
If we learned about the $$$ value of fraud that banks write off, there would probably be public outrage and a crisis of confidence in the banking system, especially now with the mortgage crisis and bank bailouts fresh in the public's mind.
If you want to know the value of fraud, just look at any major bank's quarterly statement. It's usually broken out by line-item.
Protip: start with whatever division name would hold consumer revolving credit, aka credit cards.
It's the information age; you'd be surprised at what you can find if you just drop the conspiracy theories and anti-corporatism and actually look.
Now open your favorite spreadsheet program and type in the value of your last 20 checks into the spreadsheet where you track your checking account.
Balance that against the online statement and use a calculator program to verify the totals.
Use a stopwatch to see how long it takes you; also, count the number of times you have to re-enter data due to not-quite-hitting the touchscreen "key".
Now try a keyboard and mouse. Same task. Make sure to first be a touch-typist who is competent with both a QWERTY keyboard and a 10-key pad.....I know it's fun to drag things around with your finger and play with colors, but maybe you can get your fingerpainting fix in a less expensive way....you should look into it.
You'll feel vindicated in the first paragraph or so, but keep reading, at least through:
What other treaty provisions need congressional implementation is subject to argument. In a 1907 memorandum approved by the Secretary of State, it is said, in summary of the practice and reasoning from the text of the Constitution, that the limitations on the treaty power which necessitate legislative implementation may “be found in the provisions of the Constitution which expressly confide in Congress or in other branches of the Federal Government the exercise of certain of the delegated powers....”304 The same thought has been expressed in Congress305 and by commentators.306 Resolution of the issue seems particularly one for the attention of the legislative and executive branches rather than for the courts
Treason, the topic I was speaking to when I said that international law did not supercede, is a crime against a State by a citizen of that State. Therefore, it is not typically subject to international laws, as understood by the groundwork established in the Treaty of Westphalia as concerns sovereignty of States.
Also, it is delegated to the US Congress to make laws in this area; therefore, a treaty executed by the Executive may not override it without specific approval by the Congress. Therefore, the specific US Code I quoted would have to be revoked if it conflicted with a treaty. As that Code does stand today, it cannot be in conflict with any international law applicable to the USA.
Point by point.... Second Hague Convention Article 29 (I assume you mean Article IV, you don't say and it is important): First off, these conventions are intended for warring States. There is no provision covering international movements or other extra-governmental organizations. So Wikileaks is not a protected or described participant here, and neither are groups which do not represent a territorial collective will, such as Al Qaeda. So this does not apply, as there is no State of Wikileaks. Even if it did apply, Manning was bound by restriction of his duty and the agreements he had signed to only pursue information he had a "legitimate need to know". Downloading every document you can possibly touch is not bound by any "need to know", and therefore was indeed done with false pretense.
Article 31: This assumes the other State had captured Manning as a normal battlefield soldier, not as a spy. Since Wikileaks did not capture Manning on the field of battle and seek to execute him as a spy, this does not apply. Since Manning is not a part of the Wikileaks National Defense Force (lol) and captured by the US Army on the field of battle after having spied on the US and returning to uniformed military duty with the WNDF, this does not apply.
The Nurenberg Trial principles and Red Cross Conventions you quote are just nonsense to try to create a strawman. This is not a battlefield, and Manning is not even an ersatz medic.
Manning was a US Soldier, caught by his own country, under laws which are applicable to him by his citizenship. And in no case does international law supersede national laws in a matter such as this.
Wikipedia puts it simply: United States Code at 18 U.S.C. 2381 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United State
There is no argument which can countermand this. International accords about the behaviour of States under a declaration of War do not apply, as there is no State involved in Manning's situation. But there are enemies.
Manning is guilty of Treason under US laws, and deserves the associated penalty.
If the half of the federal Supreme Court finds it acceptable to cite foreign law in constitutional cases, then what's the big deal about Spock?
I mean, if the laws passed in their jurisdiction can be overlooked in favor of an interesting thought from outside, what difference does the source really make?
Well, let's see how "honorable" Mr. Wooten spends his money.... from opensecrets..... --------------- WOOTEN, PAUL BROOKLYN,NY 11201 SELF/ATTORNEY 3/31/06 $2,000 Clarke, Yvette D (D) Wooten, Paul Brooklyn,NY 11201 Paul Wooten & Associates/Owner 11/17/04 $250 DNC Services Corp (D) WOOTEN, PAUL BROOKLYN,NY 11201 PAUL WOOTEN & ASSOC./ATTORNEY 7/23/04 $250 Towns, Edolphus (D) WOOTEN, PAUL BROOKLYN,NY 11217 ATTORNEY AT LAW 10/15/97 $250 Vitaliano, Eric (D) WOOTEN, PAUL BROOKLYN,NY 11217 ATTORNEY AT LAW 8/30/97 $250 Vitaliano, Eric (D) WOOTEN, PAUL ESQ BROOKLYN,NY 11216 ATTORNEY 4/23/92 $250 Brooklyn Democrats WOOTEN, PAUL ESQ BROOKLYN,NY 11216 ATTORNEY 4/3/91 $250 Brooklyn Democrats ----------------------
I know it's a common meme to say there's no difference between the parties.
But tort reform is one big difference. Stories like this are why. There's only one thing that profits from 4 year olds getting sued. And it's not society.
As a 12-year customer of Sprint, and as someone who's used mobile data access since before there were "smartphones", and still does with his shiny new Epic, I will tell you this:
I do not now, nor have I ever had, a data cap on my cell phone.
You, my friend, need to check the marketplace and either get a better provider or a better plan.
Anything at all to make people think they actually own and control the things they post to Facebook.
See? I can get it all back, that means it's mine.....
Facebook's had a run of bad press regarding lack of user control over posted content. This is just a feature nobody will use, dedicated to persisting the illusion of control that hides the fact that Facebook is "a place for Friending marketers".
Slashdot Mirror
A home is, for most people, their greatest source of wealth. A property tax is, therefore, a wealth tax.
If you spike a property tax, then ownership becomes expensive, and therefore, difficult. What part of this escapes you?
So instead of even a modest 1500 square foot home on a 0.15 acre lot, people will be living in a 700 square foot apartment in a huge high-rise because it escapes paying 30% of value to the tax authority every year. Um, duh. Go upstairs and talk to your parents, they can probably explain it to you.
Taxing wealth is moronic. Here's why.
"Wealth", in these tax schemes, is typically represented by owning something. Usually, that's stock or some other ownership stake, ie investment.
When you tax this, people invest less. Which means that:
-Angel investing/venture capital for the next big technological marvel dries up
-Stocks that fund every major pension fund or 401k-style account in the world lose value as investments have to be sold to pay the tax man. Result is retirees suffer and retirement becomes a pipe dream for most, because you've made it impossible to save meaningfully
-Home/property ownership becomes a game for the rich; most people will have to rent to avoid the tax on ownership.
The major reason we don't tax "wealth" until a gain is realized (Capital Gain tax) is that we WANT people to invest and take ownership. This is the essence of what drives the international economy. If you'd like the current global recession to become a global, multi-decade depression, just do this. Watch companies and capital dry up and blow away....
You only make a small part of the money involved in capturing an asteroid on commercially-viable minerals/metals like gold.
What people will pay for a space rock is way more important than what people will pay for gold. A 500 ton asteroid could be 500 tons of rock. But that would make millions of lumps of Space Rock that could be sold by The Franklin Mint in a special collectors set.
Your problem is that you're engaged in insanity. Meaning, you keep doing the same thing while expecting a different result.
Why does it have to be email? You want to have an impact, but everyone has to come to you?
Fuck off. Seriously. You're not so important that your electronic musings should get special routing - and, if you check all the misguided posts about donations and big-money special interests, you'll see that they're all focused on making you important.
Your problem isn't importance. Which is why I call those other posts misguided. This isn't even a national figure you're talking about, it's a state-level politician. So, as a voting (you do vote, right?) constituent, you're actually important enough. You just can't expect every representative you have to come to your doorstep at a time convenient to you and ask what you want or somehow magically know it's YOU with an Original Thought. That, my friend, is your problem.
If the issue is important to you, take a day off and visit their office. They all have one, and it can't be all that far away if it's in-state. Talk to a staffer; they'll write down your name, address and concerns. If you're in their district, it WILL be seen. Or, if you call ahead, you might just be able to come at a time when your representative can actually sit down and talk to you. Or hell, offer to buy a drink after legislative hours. That is a human being in that office, you know; that sort of thing tends to work with people.
The big problem here is that, much like the occupy retards, you're not willing to get off your ass and engage the system. You expect the system to come to you and listen while you whine. That doesn't work for anything, anywhere. Wait for a town hall meeting and cuss at the microphone with the other cranks.
3 words: Song of Solomon.
Go read some of the Bible and tell me again some time what you know of Christianity.
We all know that spam is typically served from infected machines. With Windows 7 deployment growing, Windows machines have been harder to break into.
So now virus writers have the Flashback virus getting into Macs so they can get spam servers.
I guess this shows that even spammers can't get much done with a Mac.
The Ogallala aquifier is going dry anyway.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/8359076/US-farmers-fear-the-return-of-the-Dust-Bowl.html
It is only fair to note that, when you got in, anybody who could spell "I.T." could get an IT jobs. There was an explosion of tech job in the late 1990s, but that bubble has, long since, burst.
The field totally crashed in 2000, and before it recovered, there were more massive layoffs in 2009.
I'd like to address this directly, because it does come up a lot, and actually illustrates what I'm talking about.
In the mid to late 1990s, there were indeed lots of people flooding into IT. Most of them were picking up a little bit of HTML, building horrible websites, and making really inappropriate amounts of money. They had no interest in technology, they just had interest in money.
The crash of 2000, which went well into 2002, swept all of these people aside. They went to follow their next get-rich-quick scheme, whether that means opening a cappuchino stand, selling Amway, or flipping houses. And believe me, they're bitter about it. As it turns out, money usually only comes through hard work.
The ones that stayed were typically the ones who actually had done core languages like C or Java, or made themselves into legitimate DBAs or server admins. They cared about their work, and bothered to ground themselves in their chosen career like any professional would do.
The people who are now making decisions (hiring managers, CIOs, etc) likely came into IT in a time when very few places offered a degree in any such thing. So a lack of a degree doesn't say much to them. Experience, skill, a desire to stay current...these things are more important than whether a college student settled on the right degree at the right time.
The 90s are an example, that's true; they're also a counter-example. Be the counter-example.
But it's still a rather hard thing this person is looking to do. No one on this board has said it'd be easy; just that it's possible. If the OP stresses the personal time spent learning languages and working on projects, and can come off as someone who isn't going to bail on IT the minute they find a graduate program/other job, then there's a chance. But you have to find the right person...and then convince them.
I've spent the last 15 years in IT performing various tasks, from programming to server admin.
You can do what you're looking to do. Here's the problem: Someone, somewhere, has to be the first to take a risk and hire you to do this.
Once you have experience, you're on your way, because IT is still an area where experience and excellence speak louder than degrees or certifications. (although that is starting to change)
The problem is, with the influx of people from around the world, offshoring, and new grads with legitimate degrees every year, who would take you? If you can find that person, great - you're "in". So the key is to network, get yourself in front of people, and highlight your development experience. I guarantee your resume won't get past the HR Drone filter looking for a specific degree. So you need to pound pavement and press flesh. It's what I did for my first 2 jobs; after that it was easier. It will also make your subsequent career easier to navigate.
If that sounds like a bit more than your interpersonal skills and contact network can handle, stretch your graduation day a couple of years out and take the classes you need to get the degree. It will make the task much easier.
Hash the credit card number.
Yes, this is how it commonly starts. Of course, you can keep the rest of the information; namely, your name and zip code. They also store everything you bought, what time, and where.
You can take the name/zip code information and compare that to the bulk download of information you got from the credit rating agency of your choice. That should tell you most of the financial information you want, including most of your former/current addresses and a decent guess at the equity on your home and your open credit card lines and what brand of car you drive (car loan). You can then run that by the info from a company like Axicom if you really want to build a profile, but I would guess that a place like Target would be happy with the trades (credit rating company info).
Once you've got that down, you can store/track every single thing purchased and build your own profile. Kind of the way they highlight in TFA. You can also cross that with census data to try to adjust the mix of product in the store - which is why you see things like grape soda in highly urban McDonalds, but not other places.
Really, if you want privacy, you should buy with cash. I know credit cards are convenient and safer than cash (as a general rule), but until we all feel better about walking around with a stack of 100s when we want to buy a TV/computer/etc, there you are.
Holy fuck you're ignorant.
Governor Orval Fabius of Arkansas, Democrat, in 1957 used the Arkansas National Guard to keep black kids out of white schools after the US Supreme Court ruled for integration in Brown v. Board of Education.
President Eisenhower, Republican, took over the Arkansas National Guard and sent in the 101st Airborne to get those kids into school.
This kind of thing happened all over the segregated South. Yes, through the 1950s and the 1960s.
You aren't just ignorant, but arrogant about pushing your completely fabricated version of history. Push your toxins where people don't read.
Rights? Go look at the civil rights struggles. The Republicans were the defenders of civil rights; the Democrats were the ones trying to make black people sit in the back of the bus. You really think a Dem would call in the national guard to let a little girl go to a better school? And that difference goes back to the 1800s when the Republican Party was founded.
Now, the "Affordable Care Act" already chokes down Medicare over the next 10 years. So that's done. Hey, any Repubs vote for that one? Strike 1.
Lower taxes on the top 1%? They make 19% of all income and pay 28% of all taxes. The top 20% makes more than $73,000/yr as a family and pays 69% of all taxes. Realize that most people on this board are in that group, then further realize that, at some point, those people choose to stop making money in the USA. Another little point for you is that 47% of Americans pay absolutely no Federal income tax, and a large portion of that 47% actually makes money by filing a tax return. You can have all of no pie, a huge piece of a tiny pie, or a slice of a gigantic, growing pie. Pigs get slaughtered, dude. Econ/math fail, strike 2.
Social security will *fail* if something drastic isn't done. The more folks like you fearmonger about any possible solution, the more hard-core that solution will need to be. It's ending. It can't go on. Deal with it and move on. You're just FUDing now, strike 3.
The American system assumes that all branches are co-equal, each with their own powers. There are checks/balances in place to prevent one branch from stepping all over the other 2.
One of these checks is the above clause. Imagine, if you will, that the President has a law before Congress and the vote is close. By instructing the TSA/FBI/CIA/etc (which are agencies of the Executive branch and under the President's direct control) to detain a few specific legislators, he could ensure the vote goes the way he wants.
Or, by detaining legislators, any President could extract promises of support....the possible abuses are obvious and many.
This is why so very many sources are going out of their way to say that Senator Paul was NOT detained. And, I would guess, the use of the word, "detained", was not an accident by Senator Paul. I would further guess that the TSA did indeed detain him, and that the whole thing is getting a massive CYA treatment from smarter folks higher up on the Washington DC food chain.
Also, this is why Congresscritters can perform acts of insider trading...oversight in that area comes from the Executive branch, which has a hard time getting someone in the Legislative on anything other than Treason or big-time felonies. So they don't bother, and the Legislative branch has chosen not to police itself in this area.
If we learned about the $$$ value of fraud that banks write off, there would probably be public outrage and a crisis of confidence in the banking system,
especially now with the mortgage crisis and bank bailouts fresh in the public's mind.
If you want to know the value of fraud, just look at any major bank's quarterly statement. It's usually broken out by line-item.
Protip: start with whatever division name would hold consumer revolving credit, aka credit cards.
It's the information age; you'd be surprised at what you can find if you just drop the conspiracy theories and anti-corporatism and actually look.
The Bible says, "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Matthew 5:28.
I don't think it's a big leap to apply this teaching to looking at kiddie porn.
Sounds like it's time for some bishops to (re)read the guidebook.
Is that how you'd keep the antenna from shorting out?
Now open your favorite spreadsheet program and type in the value of your last 20 checks into the spreadsheet where you track your checking account.
Balance that against the online statement and use a calculator program to verify the totals.
Use a stopwatch to see how long it takes you; also, count the number of times you have to re-enter data due to not-quite-hitting the touchscreen "key".
Now try a keyboard and mouse. Same task. Make sure to first be a touch-typist who is competent with both a QWERTY keyboard and a 10-key pad. ....I know it's fun to drag things around with your finger and play with colors, but maybe you can get your fingerpainting fix in a less expensive way....you should look into it.
It's not quite that simple, and there is virtually no ALWAYS in law.
Read through this:
http://law.onecle.com/constitution/article-2/18-treaties-as-law-of-the-land.html
You'll feel vindicated in the first paragraph or so, but keep reading, at least through:
What other treaty provisions need congressional implementation is subject to argument. In a 1907 memorandum approved by the Secretary of State, it is said, in summary of the practice and reasoning from the text of the Constitution, that the limitations on the treaty power which necessitate legislative implementation may “be found in the provisions of the Constitution which expressly confide in Congress or in other branches of the Federal Government the exercise of certain of the delegated powers....”304 The same thought has been expressed in Congress305 and by commentators.306 Resolution of the issue seems particularly one for the attention of the legislative and executive branches rather than for the courts
Treason, the topic I was speaking to when I said that international law did not supercede, is a crime against a State by a citizen of that State. Therefore, it is not typically subject to international laws, as understood by the groundwork established in the Treaty of Westphalia as concerns sovereignty of States.
Also, it is delegated to the US Congress to make laws in this area; therefore, a treaty executed by the Executive may not override it without specific approval by the Congress.
Therefore, the specific US Code I quoted would have to be revoked if it conflicted with a treaty. As that Code does stand today, it cannot be in conflict with any international law applicable to the USA.
Point by point....
Second Hague Convention Article 29 (I assume you mean Article IV, you don't say and it is important):
First off, these conventions are intended for warring States. There is no provision covering international movements or other extra-governmental organizations. So Wikileaks is not a protected or described participant here, and neither are groups which do not represent a territorial collective will, such as Al Qaeda. So this does not apply, as there is no State of Wikileaks.
Even if it did apply, Manning was bound by restriction of his duty and the agreements he had signed to only pursue information he had a "legitimate need to know". Downloading every document you can possibly touch is not bound by any "need to know", and therefore was indeed done with false pretense.
Article 31:
This assumes the other State had captured Manning as a normal battlefield soldier, not as a spy. Since Wikileaks did not capture Manning on the field of battle and seek to execute him as a spy, this does not apply. Since Manning is not a part of the Wikileaks National Defense Force (lol) and captured by the US Army on the field of battle after having spied on the US and returning to uniformed military duty with the WNDF, this does not apply.
The Nurenberg Trial principles and Red Cross Conventions you quote are just nonsense to try to create a strawman. This is not a battlefield, and Manning is not even an ersatz medic.
Manning was a US Soldier, caught by his own country, under laws which are applicable to him by his citizenship. And in no case does international law supersede national laws in a matter such as this.
Wikipedia puts it simply:
United States Code at 18 U.S.C. 2381 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United State
There is no argument which can countermand this. International accords about the behaviour of States under a declaration of War do not apply, as there is no State involved in Manning's situation. But there are enemies.
Manning is guilty of Treason under US laws, and deserves the associated penalty.
At least the Bush administration only tortured 3 self-declared adult enemies.
Miss him yet?
It would explain why those PETA folks are always so pissed off.
If the half of the federal Supreme Court finds it acceptable to cite foreign law in constitutional cases, then what's the big deal about Spock?
I mean, if the laws passed in their jurisdiction can be overlooked in favor of an interesting thought from outside, what difference does the source really make?
Well, let's see how "honorable" Mr. Wooten spends his money....
from opensecrets.....
---------------
WOOTEN, PAUL
BROOKLYN,NY 11201 SELF/ATTORNEY 3/31/06 $2,000 Clarke, Yvette D (D)
Wooten, Paul
Brooklyn,NY 11201 Paul Wooten & Associates/Owner 11/17/04 $250 DNC Services Corp (D)
WOOTEN, PAUL
BROOKLYN,NY 11201 PAUL WOOTEN & ASSOC./ATTORNEY 7/23/04 $250 Towns, Edolphus (D)
WOOTEN, PAUL
BROOKLYN,NY 11217 ATTORNEY AT LAW 10/15/97 $250 Vitaliano, Eric (D)
WOOTEN, PAUL
BROOKLYN,NY 11217 ATTORNEY AT LAW 8/30/97 $250 Vitaliano, Eric (D)
WOOTEN, PAUL ESQ
BROOKLYN,NY 11216 ATTORNEY 4/23/92 $250 Brooklyn Democrats
WOOTEN, PAUL ESQ
BROOKLYN,NY 11216 ATTORNEY 4/3/91 $250 Brooklyn Democrats
----------------------
I know it's a common meme to say there's no difference between the parties.
But tort reform is one big difference. Stories like this are why.
There's only one thing that profits from 4 year olds getting sued. And it's not society.
As a 12-year customer of Sprint, and as someone who's used mobile data access since before there were "smartphones", and still does with his shiny new Epic, I will tell you this:
I do not now, nor have I ever had, a data cap on my cell phone.
You, my friend, need to check the marketplace and either get a better provider or a better plan.
Anything at all to make people think they actually own and control the things they post to Facebook.
See? I can get it all back, that means it's mine.....
Facebook's had a run of bad press regarding lack of user control over posted content. This is just a feature nobody will use, dedicated to persisting the illusion of control that hides the fact that Facebook is "a place for Friending marketers".